My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-08-1996 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1996
>
07-08-1996 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2023 11:26:43 AM
Creation date
9/5/2023 11:23:09 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
425
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL <br />MEETING HELD ON JUNE 24, 1996 <br />(#3 - #2138 Joan & William Wroblewski - Continued) <br />GafFron reported that the proposal for enclosing a 4x23' concrete and block expansion of <br />the 6'x23' porch with screen requires front setback, lot coverage, and hardcover <br />variances Hardcover of 44 4% in the 75'250' zone remains the same, but lot coverage by <br />structure increases from 26.8% to 27.7% A 1 8' front setback variance would be <br />required at a 33.2' setback rather than 35' for the addition. The slab was approved 5 <br />years ago The applicant, at that time, said there were no plans to enclose the slab. <br />There were no public comments <br />Wroblewski informed the Council members that they had no other place on which to <br />enjoy the view of the lake except on the patio The screening w ould accomplish <br />mosquito control without additional hardcover <br />Hurr questioned how the zoning code would treat a screen porch differently than an <br />addition enclosed with glass Gaffron concurred that the condition of the resolution <br />limiting this enclosure to a screen porch w as hard to control Hurr recommended <br />eliminating the condition. <br />Jabbour said he w as in favor of screening He informed the applicant that no additional <br />hardcover would be permitted Jabbour said he would be concerned if the screened <br />porch would become a part of the house and another screened porch would be requested <br />in the future <br />Discussion rev olved around the idea of screening and the porch becoming a future <br />addition of the house Hurr did not see the need for screening as a hardship. Hurr also <br />was not in favor of tv'ing the hands of another owTier with conditions of denial of future <br />applications. She does not want to see any additional structure, however, at a future <br />date. <br />Jabbour asked that the record show the approval of this application would become the <br />end of the building envelope <br />Callahan reminded Council that the Planning Commission had denied another application <br />due to a past condition placed on a resolution by another Commission asking that no <br />further stnicture be allowed <br />Jlurr moved, Jabbour seconded, to adopt Resolution #3732 granting hardcover, front <br />setback, and lot coverage variances to Joan and William Wroblewski of 630 Park Lane <br />for enclosure of the existing concrete slab porch The motion included dropping the <br />condition for limiting it to screening only, but resolution shall include an advisory that the <br />property has reached its limit of lot coverage by structure Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.